more comments on initial proposal for Rules Lite: issues to tackle/defer, "just incompleteness"

• Previous message: Benjamin Grosof: "propose Datalog restriction for Rules Lite"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
• Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

Hi folks,
Here are some more (personal) further thoughts about our initial proposal 
for Rules Lite.

1. Some issues that need resolving soon, wrt tacking immediately vs. 
deferring to later version, include:
- whether to allow limited procedural attachments (especially, simple sensors);
- whether to allow logical functions, vs. impose the Datalog restriction; and
- whether to allow both unordered argument collections, vs. only ordered 
(e.g., when binary) or only unordered (e.g., when n-ary in RDF-y styles).
In the interests of simplicity, our very first version might omit these 
features.

2. Viewing the difference between LP and FOL as "just incompleteness" is 
kind of like saying that the difference between OWL and FOL is "just 
incompleteness".

Benjamin

________________________________________________________________________________________________
Prof. Benjamin Grosof
Web Technologies for E-Commerce, Business Policies, E-Contracting, Rules, 
XML, Agents, Semantic Web Services
MIT Sloan School of Management, Information Technology group
http://ebusiness.mit.edu/bgrosof or http://www.mit.edu/~bgrosof

• Next message: Mike Dean: "Joint Committee telecon today 5 August"
• Previous message: Benjamin Grosof: "propose Datalog restriction for Rules Lite"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
• Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : 08/01/03 EST